Limited power of remand in tax appeals must be used sparingly and only when the record is genuinely insufficient.

The appellate power to vary, confirm, enhance or reduce an assessment includes a limited power to remand, but that discretion is judicial and must be exercised sparingly on sound principles. A remand is justified only where the record is insufficient for an effective appellate decision or further inquiry is genuinely necessary; it cannot be used to give the assessing authority a fresh opportunity to improve its case. On the stated facts, the grounds for remand related to matters already considered or capable of decision on the existing material, so directing a de novo assessment was not sustainable in law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate authorities were justified in setting aside the assessment and remanding the matter for fresh assessment under the power conferred by section 9(3) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948.

Analysis: The appellate power to vary, confirm, enhance, or reduce an assessment includes the power to remand, but that power is judicial in nature and must be exercised sparingly, on sound judicial principles, and not as a matter of whim or to give the assessing authority another opportunity to make out a better case. A remand is justified only where the existing record is insufficient to decide the appeal effectively or where further inquiry is genuinely necessary. On the facts, the principal grounds relied upon for remand related to matters already rejected by the Sales Tax Officer or capable of decision on the material already on record, and the alleged need for further inquiry did not justify a de novo assessment.

Conclusion: The remand order was not sustainable in law and the revision succeeded in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appellate authorities exceeded their jurisdiction in directing a de novo assessment, and the assessment could not be set aside on the grounds recorded.

Ratio Decidendi: The power to remand an assessment is a judicial discretion to be exercised cautiously and only when the record is insufficient for a proper appellate decision; it cannot be used merely to afford the assessing authority a fresh opportunity to improve the case.

---